![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Odd thing I just came across: Christopher Burt, the Weather Underground weather historian, looked into trends, if any, in annual and decadal snowfall amounts (decades with most and least snow, and the averages) in the US since 1900. Conclusion: it's hard to figure out much, because the data just aren't good enough.
"Inherent Problems with the Data" is the subhead on about a third of the article. The main problem is that measuring techniques have changed over time, in ways that change the results. Different sites changed at different times, which means that correcting for this would be a lot of work. (A lot of work at best--that assumes that the records document how the numbers were measured.)
He then says
"Inherent Problems with the Data" is the subhead on about a third of the article. The main problem is that measuring techniques have changed over time, in ways that change the results. Different sites changed at different times, which means that correcting for this would be a lot of work. (A lot of work at best--that assumes that the records document how the numbers were measured.)
He then says
it is still worth mentioning some general trends:
—The 1920s and 1930s seem to have been the least snowy decades since 1900.
—The 1960s and 1970s seem to have been the snowiest decades since 1900.
—Snowfall in the nine-year period of 2011-2019 means that the 2010s will be Boston’s snowiest decade, while the period was less snowy than any prior decade on record for Washington, D.C., and Raleigh, North Carolina. Snowfall averaged above normal from Philadelphia northward and below normal south of there.
